• girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not totally a CMHC issue here. People/businesses buying up housing as investments is the bigger problem and it should be clamped down on … ie: first 2 properties = basic taxes, increased by 2% for every additional property owned (3rd is basic + 2%, 4th is basic + 4%, etc).

    • cadekat@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it’s purchased as an investment, but still rented out, how does that make housing less affordable?

      I fully support vacant home taxes, but the idea that investors (and people often blame foreign investors specifically) are to blame seems flawed to me.

      If there was enough housing supply, prices would drop, no?

      • gramie@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Housing becomes less affordable because suddenly rent has to cover the owner’s profit as well as the cost of the mortgage. No one is going to invest in housing if there is no profit, and they are going to do what they can to make the profit as high as possible.

        A landlord is essentially a middleman between the mortgage holder and the resident. Renting can make sense, especially for people who are not living somewhere for a long time, but currently people are renting simply because there is no way they can afford to buy a house.

    • MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not nearly enough tax to make it effective, you need to increase the amount 25 or 50% for each additional home. Nobody should be using housing as an investment, it’s for living. This should also include any corporations owning investment properties as well.